About your Search

20120901
20120930
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
of 1969, nepa. nepa has been under attack by the republicans for years. most famously former chairman led an effort before leaving congress. nepa stands for two very simple principles. the first is the federal government should think before it acts. and the second is that the federal government should listen to the american people before it acts. nepa does not dictate outcome, it requires federal agencies to gather information, consider alternatives, seek public input before taking action that would significantly impact the environment. waiving nepa means waiving educated decision making, waiving nepa means waiving transparency and waiving nepa means waiving the possibility that the american people should play a role in managing the natural resources which they own. in the case of h.r. 5544, waiving nepa means waiving any process for determining which federal lands will be given to the state, what lands will be traded away and how will they be chosen. apparently that information is to remain secret. will lands currently used for recreation or to protect water quality or to preserve critic
will see expedited nepa review and also the working to shape the next transportation bill now protecting against cuts to transit and to preserve the programs as stand alone programs and not just programs that are part of larger highway programs. making sure that ridership is a strong consideration and the formula distribution and state of good repair needs for older transit systems. and also working to institutionalize a multimodule approach to funding. >> that is the end my presentation. i think that (inaudible) would like to make a couple of comments. >> yes. we do have plans and programs starting at 10:30, but go ahead. >> what actually deferred to you mr. gentleman, if you want to open the discussion with the committee first, i have a couple of comments that i want to make about this over all shape of the map-21 and where it leaves us. i think that it is interesting to do a very high-level birds eye view summary. we have no ear marks, no competitive awards for projects. it is all formulas back to the state. and no tiger grant program. but, the tifia program grows 700 percent and the
into our cars to our homes. while i generally support the aims of nepa, the state of minnesota has some of the strictest environmental standards in the country and a track record of successful regulation of mining and logging. on the other hand, special interest groups have a track record of abusing the nepa process to sue and delay. i do not want these groups to continue to delay this land exchange preventing minnesota schools from receiving the funding that they need and quite frankly they deserve. the state of minnesota cannot afford to be sued by environmental groups for years. some of those arguing for nepa are in fact arguing that defending lawsuits is an appropriate use of the taxpayer dollars and that it's ok to transfer wealth from the state commerce to special interest groups. interesting to note, many of these special groups aren't even from minnesota. make no mistake, this will be passed in a bipartisan land -- and a bipartisan land exchange is going to get done. i will not allow special interest groups, acting in bad faith, to abuse the nepa process and use frivolous lawsui
white house and through congress. for over 40 years now, nepa has required federal agencies to prepare environmental impact statements for any major projects. nepa is justly regarded as the foundation for u.s. environmental protections. but what began as a bipartisan triumph was later subject to partisan divide. while in the house in 2005, i served as the ranking member of a task force whose stated purpose was to review and improve nepa. but there were those who wanted to destroy it. with one swift blow or by 1,000 cuts, but destroy it all the same. many of us fought very hard not to let that happen. as i said at that time, where critics saw only day, nepa was then and is now an antidote to the potential arrogance of government power. it listens to the community. it addressings opposition early on and in the long run minimizes conflict and protects the environment. it trusts the american people to take part in managing their public resources. and it remains one of u russell train's greatest legacies. russ himself stated it best at the 40th anniversary of nepa. he said then that "nepa i
. to be clear this bill does exempt only the land exchange portion from nepa. the land exchange itself would have no environmental impact, and any future development would still be subject to strict state and federal regulations. again, a land swap is merely a redrawing of maps and has no environmental impact in and of itself. i want to be very transparent here, though. one of my goals is to have this bill created to make sure that we have jobs in northern minnesota. the lands listed in senate file 1750 are rich in natural resources. many of them lie opinion portions of the superior national forest already being successfully mined for iron ore and harvested for timber. it creates thousands of good paying jobs in the region. northern minnesotans need these opportunities and every american benefits from the steel and lumber that goes into our cars to our homes. i generally support nepa, but obstructionist and special interest groups have a track record of abusing the nepa process. the state of minnesota cannot afford to be sued by environmental groups for years into foot ture just for the sake
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)